Kavanaugh is not an originalist, vote him down so Trump makes a better pick

[mikegriffith1]

How was Garland "not far left?" Be specific

Garland was liberal on many issues, but I don't think he was far left. On a few issues, he was genuinely centrist or even mildly conservative.

 

[kaz]

I'm totally disappointed. I hope the Republicans vote him down and force Trump to make a better pick. Being an originalist is not pick and choose, sometimes you are, sometimes you're not.

Obamacare

Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Penned Healthcare Dissent Focused On Tax

I get that the penalty is a tax. But Obamacare is SO much more than a penalty. His logic, which the ape Roberts parroted, was the penalty itself was a tax, therefore the entire Obamacare plan was fine. It's the other way around. There is no possible way to get that healthcare exchanges and healthcare payments to insurance companies are taxes.

If there was a severability clause, he could have struck down all the legislation other than the penalty, but there wasn't. And regardless, he voted that since the penalty was Constitutional, the rest of the Unconstitutional provisions were Constitutional

Metadata

Kavanaugh: "The Fourth Amendment does not bar all searches and seizures. It bars only unreasonable searches and seizures."

How is metadata about our phone calls not unreasonable with no warrant? They're specifically taking information from private businesses about our phone calls. You can justify anything with that logic. Get a warrant!

Trump’s Supreme Court nominee opposes net neutrality, supports NSA bulk collection

The SCOTUS's job is to vigilantly protect our rights. These are two clear cases that he clearly didn't. Is he going to be Souter II? He may be, he's not a vigilant defender of Constitutionally protected freedom

Originalists have been consistently hostile toward Fourth Amendment rights, in support of government authority to conduct searches absent a warrant (see, for example, Minnesota v. Carter (1998)).

I only read the cliff notes, but if the police saw him through an open window, how did he have an expectation of privacy? I'm not taking a position, I'm asking the question.

Would a homeowner think they have an expectation of privacy through an open window? I don't see what his having been a guest has to do with it.

As for a guest, I think it would depend on the context.

- If the homeowner searched their belongings, found the coke and called the cops, the cops had every right to enter at the homeowner's invitation and perform a search.

- The cops would not have a right to barge into a house the owner did not to consent to a search and just say you're not the owner, we can barge in and search. They can't

However, if they saw a crime through an open window, that is neither case

 

[kaz]

How was Garland "not far left?" Be specific

Garland was liberal on many issues, but I don't think he was far left. On a few issues, he was genuinely centrist or even mildly conservative.

I said "be specific." I didn't ask for your unsupported opinion. What has he done that is not "far left" other than the far left fake news media saying he's not far left?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

‘Originalism’ is nothing but rightwing political dogma masquerading as legal philosophy.

 

[Cecilie1200]

How was Garland "not far left?" Be specific

Garland was liberal on many issues, but I don't think he was far left. On a few issues, he was genuinely centrist or even mildly conservative.

Yeah, being "mildly conservative on a few issues" does not negate being far left.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Kavanaugh has a solid record on gun rights, regulation, separation of powers, religious freedom (he wrote against Obamacare's contraception mandate), freedom of speech, allowing prayer at high school football games, school choice, and limited government (he wrote against the CFPB). He has also indicated a respect for unborn children: “[the government] has permissible interests in favoring fetal life, protecting the best interests of a minor, and refraining from facilitating abortion."

 

[g5000]

McConnell prevented another far left liberal from getting on the court. It was politics as usual. Reid changed the senate rules, now the dems are having that change shoved up their asses.

No, that would only have happened if a real conservative had been nominated. Kavanaugh smells like swamp muck, he'll glide through appointment before November.

Perhaps Trump picked Kavanaugh because Kavanaugh believes a President should not be investigated while in office.

and if this is true then it would be kennedy who picked kavanaugh now huh?

maybe people should wait for facts vs. make them up first.

I said perhaps, dipshit.

See post 75.

Perhaps you're a transvestite prostitute who specializes in doing threesomes with midgets.

I said "perhaps" ...

Perhaps that is your masturbation fantasy about me.

 

[JakeStarkey]

miketgriffith has shown that Kavanaugh is solidly conservative: that he is not ultra right or libertarian is a blessing for America.

 

[ptbw forever]

This is a good choice. Trump will get at least one more in the next couple of years, Ginsburg could go any day, she cant even stay awake.

How in the world is the weakest, least-textualist candidate of the four a "good choice"?

Because he is the only one who can make it through, and he is one who will make Democrats look the most foolish, while still being better than Kennedy.

Which situation would you rather have, Kavanaugh and most likely Barret later, or Trump’s 2nd Supreme Court pick going down like the health care law and Trump’s “winning” taking another hit?

A better pick

Which you wouldn’t get through even with McCain voting.

A pick going down just a month before the mid terms would be very bad for Trump, Republicans and the country at large.

I totally disagree with your entire line of thinking.

I think your recipe for blind obedience to the party whatever it does is the recipe to make a Democrat

I have no such blind loyalty to Republicans.

I just know that Democrats are not an option anymore, and I very much believe in Trump.

 

[jon_berzerk]

He’s going to catch a lot of heat from his base over this choice. Maybe an easy sacrifice for the opposition to shoot down, so his second pick (his real desire) gets fast tracked through...? Not sure. This choice is a head scratcher...

Sounds like Trump is throwing the globalists a bone.

I wonder where his position on the 2nd Amendment is.

strong 2nd amendment supporter

stated semi autos are protected class of firearms

 

[basquebromance]

"we live in an age of vulgarity" - Kavanaugh said, in a clear indictment of Trump

one man's vulgarity is another man's lyric, pal!

 

[Tom Horn]

All you leftist experts on nothing might want to know Kennedy handed his resignation to Trump and Trump accepted it....he can't change his mind at this point. Why would he? He wanted Trump to name his replacement and suggested Kavanaugh....Kennedy got exactly what he wanted.

Actually there is nothing preventing him withdrawing his resignation prior to July 31st. The president can't compel him to retire.


.>>>>

There is no precedent and the Constitution doesn't mention it, but Trump could decline to accept a withdrawal because a replacement has been named, thus enforcing the retirement on July 31st. I doubt a lower court would rule on the matter or the USSC would accept the case to rule on it since all 8 other Justices would have to recuse themselves. Here's the only thing I could find on it and the author is a writer, not a lawyer.

https://www.quora.com/Can-Justice-K...signation-date-to-3-years-later-is-that-legal

 

[Clementine]

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Bull. Those expenditures are supposed to be spent only on Constitutionally authorized Federal powers

And the constitution authorizes the Congress to spend in nearly any manner way it deems to contribute to the general welfare of the United States.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

He lied under oath and then lied last night.

BUT, he also gave the cheeto that required oath of obedience and loyalty so he's in.

 

[kaz]

Bull. Those expenditures are supposed to be spent only on Constitutionally authorized Federal powers

And the constitution authorizes the Congress to spend in nearly any manner way it deems to contribute to the general welfare of the United States.

You don't know what you're talking about. You're just making up your shit.

Read the 10th amendment, then the 9th, honey

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Bull. Those expenditures are supposed to be spent only on Constitutionally authorized Federal powers

And the constitution authorizes the Congress to spend in nearly any manner way it deems to contribute to the general welfare of the United States.

You don't know what you're talking about. You're just making up your shit.

Read the 10th amendment, then the 9th, honey

The 9th and 10th don't have anything to do with federal spending, you moron!

 

[kaz]

Bull. Those expenditures are supposed to be spent only on Constitutionally authorized Federal powers

And the constitution authorizes the Congress to spend in nearly any manner way it deems to contribute to the general welfare of the United States.

You don't know what you're talking about. You're just making up your shit.

Read the 10th amendment, then the 9th, honey

The 9th and 10th don't have anything to do with federal spending, you moron!

Omg. Stick to porn

 

[Redfish]

This is a good choice. Trump will get at least one more in the next couple of years, Ginsburg could go any day, she cant even stay awake.

How in the world is the weakest, least-textualist candidate of the four a "good choice"?

that's a matter of opinion, and opinions are like assholes--------everybody has one. The senate will decide and in reality it will have zero affect on 99% of us

 

[Edgetho]